On 7/12/22 15:08, Damien Le Moal wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c b/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
index 6acc4f406eb8..32da54e7b68a 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
@@ -716,17 +716,15 @@ static int sd_zbc_check_capacity(struct scsi_disk
*sdkp, unsigned char *buf,
if (ret)
return ret;
- if (sdkp->rc_basis == 0) {
- /* The max_lba field is the capacity of this device */
- max_lba = get_unaligned_be64(&buf[8]);
- if (sdkp->capacity != max_lba + 1) {
- if (sdkp->first_scan)
- sd_printk(KERN_WARNING, sdkp,
- "Changing capacity from %llu to
max LBA+1 %llu\n",
- (unsigned long long)sdkp->capacity,
- (unsigned long long)max_lba + 1);
- sdkp->capacity = max_lba + 1;
- }
+ /* The max_lba field is the capacity of this device */
+ max_lba = get_unaligned_be64(&buf[8]);
+ if (sdkp->capacity != max_lba + 1) {
+ if (sdkp->first_scan)
+ sd_printk(KERN_WARNING, sdkp,
+ "Changing capacity from %llu to max LBA+1 %llu\n",
+ (unsigned long long)sdkp->capacity,
+ (unsigned long long)max_lba + 1);
+ sdkp->capacity = max_lba + 1;
}
if (sdkp->zone_starting_lba_gran == 0) {
That is, always check the reported capacity against max_lba of report
zones reply, regardless of rc_basis (and we can even then drop the
rc_basis field from struct scsi_disk).
I like the above patch because it simplifies the existing code.
But I would argue that any problem with the current code would mean a
buggy device firmware. For such case, the device FW should be fixed or we
should add a quirk for it.
My question was which approach should be followed for devices with a
buggy firmware? Use the zones up to the LBA reported in the READ
CAPACITY response or reject these devices entirely?
Thanks,
Bart.
